With many companies deciding to make environmentally conscious ways of doing business, huge changes that affect the regular function of doing things are underway. who's to say what should get a makeover and what should not? I am all for a building becoming a solar-powered Cave of Wonders, cars turning into hybrid "Megatron" monsters, and people tracking their carbon footprints. I do believe that we humans are here on this planet for a reason, therefore we must take great care of the habitat being dwelled in. But are some new eco-savvy ways of doing things the best solution for our customers? Mainly, I am examining the switch from the hardcopy newsletter to the online "e-newsletter".
Sure, the online newsletter seems like a great, efficient way of saving trees and allowing the same information to be spread through a different channel. All employees still receive the newsletter, it's just now in a different format. With an e-newsletter, paper isn't wasted, it is accessible and savable on the computer, and people can print different stories, photos and features that they are interested in. Overall, I agree that it is an easy, cost-effecient way to inform your organization or company.
It is arguably obvious that once you lose the hardcopy newsletter, you lose a little bit of nostalgic formality that has been found within an organization for years. It is proven that one reads a computer screen differently than a printed page full of information. With a hardcopy newsletter, one can enjoy the benefits of becoming educated on all areas of the company, and not just zone in on the specific articles they find interesting. A hardcopy newsletter can be felt, touched, rolled up, and brought along on breaks or on-site jobs. A company that specifically works in home repair, like a plumbing company, must have a way to communicate with repairmen who never look at a computer screen. By keeping a newsletter in print, the company is able to give it to the repairmen, and they are able to take it with them as they drive. Another positive aspect is uniting the company with a sense of community by connecting them to one another as they read about their company on paper. Plus, an inbox for an email account gets bombarded with all kinds of spam, online documents, and corporate emails; it's appropriate to give eyes a break from a computer screen.
All in all, I feel that keeping a hardcopy newsletter is something that is more valuable in the end. Many coworkers look forward to the day that they can sit back, prop their feet up, and read about the daily happenings within their company that doesn't directly involve them. I say it is a priceless road of communication that should not be tampered with.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Monday, February 22, 2010
Jour 4250: February 22 Lecture
I was extremely impressed by all of the presenters in class today. I felt that Addley Fannin did a terrific job, and was so creative. During her presentation, I began to think about why there are so few video games targeted for women, and why so few women were quoted in the gaming publications. Is it because women's motor skills aren't as developed? Because women don't find entertainment in violence? Because women have better things to do than play video games and complete levels? All of these reasons could contribute to this theory, but more importantly, how do men find time to do these things? I find it outrageous to think that so many men will neglect life and social responsibilities for a trivial video game. I haven't done my research, but it makes me wonder.
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Jour 4250: February 15 Lecture
While watching "The Black Press" during class, the images of the lynchings will stick with me forever. It makes my blood boil to think that white Americans could do that in good conscience. It is impossible to think that so many stories of the African-Americans have gone untold, and am so thankful for seeing the documentary. It is moments like these that make a good education completely worth it in every way.
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Who's to say who's right? Jour 4470
Blog Post 1: Mike Leach versus ESPN
When diving into the world of ethics, one finds himself tangled up in a web of multiple theories and explanations for what is right and wrong, why it is right or wrong, and how it is right or wrong. With theories like deontology, consequentialism, egoism and virtue ethics, how does one establish which path is correct for ethically right behavior? Reading the Mike Leach article, written by Don Ohlmeyer, raises many questions and eyebrows. If we were to compare the Mike Leach versus Craig James and his family debacle to the theories mentioned, what would that look like? How did ESPN play in to the scandal?
According to Karla Gower, author of “Legal and Ethical Considerations for Public Relations”, deontology holds that “certain underlying principles are right or wrong, regardless of their consequences”. Due to Craig James’ direct involvement with the scandal and his influence at ESPN, it would have been wise for ESPN to deliberately remain as neutral and unbiased as possible. All this to say, it may have been less “fair” to the audience who tuned in to hear about the Leach firing, but it would have kept ESPN from sounding extremely biased.
Consequentialism, according to Gower, states that an “action is good if its consequences are good…and an action is bad if its consequences are bad”. It is known as a utilitarian stance, or as Jeremy Bentham, an eighteenth century proponent of utilitarianism, said, “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”. In that case, ESPN may have gone along with telling the audience the straight facts about who said what and why it was said. Bias should not have played a part in this whatsoever.
Egoism is best described as “enlightened self-interest, and contends that an act is morally right if it best promotes the individual’s long-term interests” (Gower 6). Leach and Craig James both could have used this theory to better promote themselves in their long-term career goals. Leach wanted to appear innocent by blaming his rash decision of punishing James’ son, Adam, in a “closet”. He told the press and his staff the Adam James’ actions deserved this. On the other end of the spectrum, Craig James got an opportunity to further advance his personal opinion of Leach’s coaching style by influencing those [ESPN] around him. In turn, both parties failed to consider the other one involved.
Aristotle implied that the golden mean, or “moderation as the path to a virtuous life”, reminds us “that character does make a difference” (Gower 7). A person that carries a sense of self-values close to their heart will, more often than not, do the right thing. By peering through the virtue ethics lens, both Leach and Adam James are at fault. If Mike Leach would have treated Adam and Craig James with more kindness than this uproar would have not been as much of an issue. If the James’ would have considered Leach’s role as the head coach of Texas Tech and not an abusive tyrant, then Leach would still have his position as head coach.
Overall, there are so many ways to look at a certain issue that you will think yourself to death. ESPN chose to televise a biased broadcast and Leach equally chose to choose Adam James with disrespect during practice. In turn, who is to say who is right and who is wrong? If we view one another as equals and as human beings with values, opinions and strong emotions, then your gut can oftentimes point you in the correct direction.
Sources:
Gower, K. K. (2008). Legal and Ethical Considerations for Public Relations. Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc.
When diving into the world of ethics, one finds himself tangled up in a web of multiple theories and explanations for what is right and wrong, why it is right or wrong, and how it is right or wrong. With theories like deontology, consequentialism, egoism and virtue ethics, how does one establish which path is correct for ethically right behavior? Reading the Mike Leach article, written by Don Ohlmeyer, raises many questions and eyebrows. If we were to compare the Mike Leach versus Craig James and his family debacle to the theories mentioned, what would that look like? How did ESPN play in to the scandal?
According to Karla Gower, author of “Legal and Ethical Considerations for Public Relations”, deontology holds that “certain underlying principles are right or wrong, regardless of their consequences”. Due to Craig James’ direct involvement with the scandal and his influence at ESPN, it would have been wise for ESPN to deliberately remain as neutral and unbiased as possible. All this to say, it may have been less “fair” to the audience who tuned in to hear about the Leach firing, but it would have kept ESPN from sounding extremely biased.
Consequentialism, according to Gower, states that an “action is good if its consequences are good…and an action is bad if its consequences are bad”. It is known as a utilitarian stance, or as Jeremy Bentham, an eighteenth century proponent of utilitarianism, said, “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”. In that case, ESPN may have gone along with telling the audience the straight facts about who said what and why it was said. Bias should not have played a part in this whatsoever.
Egoism is best described as “enlightened self-interest, and contends that an act is morally right if it best promotes the individual’s long-term interests” (Gower 6). Leach and Craig James both could have used this theory to better promote themselves in their long-term career goals. Leach wanted to appear innocent by blaming his rash decision of punishing James’ son, Adam, in a “closet”. He told the press and his staff the Adam James’ actions deserved this. On the other end of the spectrum, Craig James got an opportunity to further advance his personal opinion of Leach’s coaching style by influencing those [ESPN] around him. In turn, both parties failed to consider the other one involved.
Aristotle implied that the golden mean, or “moderation as the path to a virtuous life”, reminds us “that character does make a difference” (Gower 7). A person that carries a sense of self-values close to their heart will, more often than not, do the right thing. By peering through the virtue ethics lens, both Leach and Adam James are at fault. If Mike Leach would have treated Adam and Craig James with more kindness than this uproar would have not been as much of an issue. If the James’ would have considered Leach’s role as the head coach of Texas Tech and not an abusive tyrant, then Leach would still have his position as head coach.
Overall, there are so many ways to look at a certain issue that you will think yourself to death. ESPN chose to televise a biased broadcast and Leach equally chose to choose Adam James with disrespect during practice. In turn, who is to say who is right and who is wrong? If we view one another as equals and as human beings with values, opinions and strong emotions, then your gut can oftentimes point you in the correct direction.
Sources:
Gower, K. K. (2008). Legal and Ethical Considerations for Public Relations. Long Grove, Illinois: Waveland Press, Inc.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Jour 4460: Hey reporters! How 'bout you pick up the phone?
As a student majoring in public relations, I am being taught how the world of public relations works, what it looks like, how to get involved, and all kinds of techniques as to be a marketable public relations representative. With my fingers crossed, I hope to goodness that I am offered a job through one of my many internships or through some stroke of luck. I have an extremely marketable major from a well-known journalism school, but how in the world will I know that I am going to be a successful employee in the public relations department someday? I can see myself sitting down at my desk the first day on the job and saying, "okay, now what?" How do I get my business in the media, and how do I make them a big deal?
I googled "reporter help", and came across the Web site, helpareporter.com. This Web site advertises "Fortune 500 PR for Free!" Now, how easy could that really be? As with most websites, you are required to sign your life away and create a username and password that they internet world can identify you by. I just don't know if I can trust these things or not. Could this really work, or is it some sort of scam that I'm supposed to buy into? There are currently 29,478 reporters logged into helpareporter.com, and daily pitches are e-mailed to your e-mail inquiring if your company has the source they could be looking for.
The one problem I have with communication via the internet is the lack of personal contact. These reporters could be mythical or a scam. With so many "hook-up" venues for journalists and public relations representatives, just how far is too far? Don't reporters get overwhelmed and forget certain areas on the internet where they can find their information? The lack of face-to-face, or voice-to-ear, conversation leaves me unsettled. I was interested in becoming a public relations professional with the hopes that my love for people and conversation would someday open these very doors that are being propped up by websites that do all of the work for you. It might just be my personal opinion, but oftentimes I wish my personal public relations skills were put to the test more often. It's why I even considered this major in the first place.
I googled "reporter help", and came across the Web site, helpareporter.com. This Web site advertises "Fortune 500 PR for Free!" Now, how easy could that really be? As with most websites, you are required to sign your life away and create a username and password that they internet world can identify you by. I just don't know if I can trust these things or not. Could this really work, or is it some sort of scam that I'm supposed to buy into? There are currently 29,478 reporters logged into helpareporter.com, and daily pitches are e-mailed to your e-mail inquiring if your company has the source they could be looking for.
The one problem I have with communication via the internet is the lack of personal contact. These reporters could be mythical or a scam. With so many "hook-up" venues for journalists and public relations representatives, just how far is too far? Don't reporters get overwhelmed and forget certain areas on the internet where they can find their information? The lack of face-to-face, or voice-to-ear, conversation leaves me unsettled. I was interested in becoming a public relations professional with the hopes that my love for people and conversation would someday open these very doors that are being propped up by websites that do all of the work for you. It might just be my personal opinion, but oftentimes I wish my personal public relations skills were put to the test more often. It's why I even considered this major in the first place.
Monday, February 8, 2010
Jour 4250: February 8 Lecture
Today, we watched a film in class that discussed the role that gender stereotyping has been played throughout media and, in turn, has affected our society. For one, many times women are seen as sex objects that are used as mental pleasure toys to entice the male audience. Often, women's response to the stereotype is that they will play the stereotype up and continue to fulfill the part of the "seductress" because it is expected of them. The media and advertisers know that sex sells.
Another thing that we discussed in class was the Vanity Fair article that reported on the two "Queen B.'s" in broadcast media. Our discussion led us to talk about statistics, and that most men are CEOs of companies and many women do not feel the need to advance themselves corporately. I am an extremely headstrong woman and am gifted in many areas just as men are, but I personally do not want to be a leader in a corporate setting because ultimately I want to have a family. Having a family and taking care of my children is what I personally feel called to do. It is the most important job that I can think of, and I think that many women also feel that calling and therefore do not wish to live in the corporate world. I may be completely off, but I do feel that women are born with an innate sense of care and are much more affectionate than the majority of men. I, Emily McMeans, was born with the most important job to do; to take care of the next generation who will someday lead the country.
Another thing that we discussed in class was the Vanity Fair article that reported on the two "Queen B.'s" in broadcast media. Our discussion led us to talk about statistics, and that most men are CEOs of companies and many women do not feel the need to advance themselves corporately. I am an extremely headstrong woman and am gifted in many areas just as men are, but I personally do not want to be a leader in a corporate setting because ultimately I want to have a family. Having a family and taking care of my children is what I personally feel called to do. It is the most important job that I can think of, and I think that many women also feel that calling and therefore do not wish to live in the corporate world. I may be completely off, but I do feel that women are born with an innate sense of care and are much more affectionate than the majority of men. I, Emily McMeans, was born with the most important job to do; to take care of the next generation who will someday lead the country.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Jour 4250: February 1 Lecture
When our class split up into groups, I joined together with two other white girls with blonde hair and we talked with two biracial girls and one biracial boy. Our conversation was so open and honest that I felt so comfortable bringing up the different ways that we view our race and other races. I brought up the point that a lot of races are told certain stereotypes about themselves that they begin to think those certain things about themselves. Growing up as a blonde-haired girl that had a curvy body and big lips, I began to see myself as a "sex symbol", in the same way that my culture was telling me to act and look like. It wasn't until I matured and began to discover who I was that I changed my own self-image. I don't see myself as a dumb blonde anymore, but an intelligent woman who has just as much brains as anyone else in the room. I loved talking with my fellow peers about these things and can't wait until we do it again!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
